This prerequisite is a big one, not only because it’s required for all projects, but also because it feeds directly into EAc1: Optimize Energy Performance, where about a fifth of the total available points in LEED are at stake. Master these minimum requirements, and you can use the same compliance path as in EAp2 to earning points.
You won’t earn the prerequisite by accident, though. Although “energy efficiency” is on everyone’s lips, the mandatory and performance-based requirements for EAp2 go beyond code compliance in most places. That said, there is nothing to stop you from meeting the requirements with a reasonable amount of effort, and the environmental benefits as well as the operational cost savings are significant.
Most projects start by choosing which of the three available compliance paths to follow. We’ll look at them each in turn.
Option 1 alone gives you access to all of the points available through EAc1, and offers the most flexibility in giving you credit for innovative designs.
First, you need to meet the mandatory requirements of ASHRAE 90.1-2007 for all major components, including the envelope, HVAC, lighting, and domestic hot water. ASHRAE 90.1 has had some changes and new mandatory requirements since the 2004 version, which was referenced on previous LEED systems, so be sure to review the standard carefully.
Energy efficiency is an area where it behooves project teams to start early and work together to maximize savings. Playing catch-up later on can be costly.Second, you need to demonstrate a 10% savings (5% for existing buildings) for your designed building compared with a baseline case meeting the minimum requirements of ASHRAE 90.1 (or Title 24-2005, Part 6 for California projects). You do this by creating a computer model following rules described in Appendix G of ASHRAE 90.1.
Computer modeling offers the following key advantages:
Your building type may not have a choice—you may have to follow this path, because both Options 2 and 3 are prescriptive compliance paths that are only available to specific building types and sizes.
However, if your building type and size allow, and you don’t want to embark on the complex process of computer modeling, which also requires expert assistance from a modeler or from a member of the mechanical engineer’s team, the prescriptive compliance paths are a good way to earn the prerequisite simply by following a checklist.
Passive design strategies such as shading to reduce solar heat gain are the most cost-effective ways to improve energy performance.Note, however, that when you get to EAc1, there are a lot fewer points on the table for the prescriptive paths, and that you have to follow each prescriptive requirement. These paths also require more collaboration and focus early on in design than you might think. The design team must work together to integrate all of the prescriptive requirements, and Option 3 even requires documentation of certain design processes.
The Advanced Energy Design Guides are published by ASHRAE for office, warehouse, and retail projects less than 20,000 ft2—so if you don’t fall into one of those categories, you’re not eligible for this path.
These guides outline strategies to reduce energy use by 30% from 2001 levels, or an amount equivalent to approximately 10%–14% reduction from ASHRAE 90.1-2007. If you choose this compliance path, become familiar with the list of prescriptive requirements and commit to meeting all of them.
The Core Performance Guide path is a good option if all of the following are true:
Comply with all requirements within Sections 1 and 2 of the guide. If you choose this path, become familiar with the list of prescriptive requirements and commit to meeting them. Also note that it’s not just a list of prescriptive requirements, but a prescribed process for achieving energy efficiency goals. You must demonstrate that you considered a couple of alternate designs, for example, and that certain team meetings were held.
Energy efficiency offers a clear combination of environmental benefit and benefit to the owner through reduced operational expenses, and potentially reduced first costs, if you’re able to reduce the size and complexity of your HVAC system with a more efficient envelope.
High-tech HVAC systems, and onsite renewable energy generation are often signature components of green buildings, but consider these strategies more “icing” on the cake, rather than a place to start. Start with building orientation and passive design features first. Also look at envelope design, such as energy-efficient windows, walls and roof, before looking at HVAC and plug loads. A poorly designed envelope with a high-tech HVAC system is not, on the whole, efficient or cost-effective.
Projects connected to district energy systems will not be able to utilize the system efficiencies of the base plant to demonstrate compliance with the prerequisite. They can plan on benefiting from these systems under EAc1, however.
Focusing on energy efficiency and renewable energy generation can seem to add costs to a project, but there are a variety of utility-provided, as well as state, and federal incentives available to offset those premiums. (See Resources.)
Ideally if the software you are using cannot model a technology directly then seek a published workaround related to your software. If you can't find a published workaround then model it as you think it should be modeled and explain how you have modeled it in the preliminary LEED submission.
No, not if it is part of the LEED project. However, there is an exemption for existing building envelopes in Appendix G that allow you to model the existing condition in the baseline so you do not pay a penalty.
No, not for an existing building.
You must model accurately. Since you don't have enough savings in the building energy, find savings in the process. Either you will be able to demonstrate that compared to a conventional baseline the process being installed into the factory is demonstrably better than "similar newly constructed facilities," allowing you to claim some savings, or the owner needs to install some energy-saving measures into the process to get the project the rest of the way there. Either option can be difficult, but not impossible.
Account for process load reductions through the exceptional calculation method. A baseline must be established based on standard practice for the process in your location. Any claim of energy savings needs a thorough narrative explaining the baseline and the strategy for energy savings along with an explanation of how the savings were calculated.
It is common to have a 80%–90% process load in a manufacturing facility. The 25% default in LEED is based on office buildings. If you think your load is lower than 25%, it is recommended that you explain why in a short narrative. It is also recommended to briefly explain it if your load is 25% exactly, since that level commonly reveals that the process loads were not accurately represented.
The energy savings are based on the whole building energy use—building and process. LEED does not stipulate exactly where they come from.
For LEED 2009 you'll need touse 90.1-2007. There were some significant changes in 90.1-2010—too many to account for in your LEED review, and your project would also have a much harder time demonstrating the same percentage energy savings.
Yes according to LEED, although it is not recommended as a best practice, and it is usually more cost-effective to invest in energy savings in the building.
You can assume exterior lighting savings for canopies against the baseline, but not the shading effects of canopies.
If exterior lighting is present on the project site, consider it as a constant in both energy model cases.
Any conditioned area must be included in the energy model.
The Energy Star portion of the form does not apply to international projects.
Use the tables and definitions provided in 90.1 Appendix B to determine an equivalent ASHRAE climate zone.
International projects are not required to enter a Target Finder score. Target Finder is based on U.S. energy use data.
For Section 188.8.131.52c, a manual control device would be sufficient to comply with mandatory provisions.
Submitting these forms is not common; however, it can be beneficial if you are applying for any exceptions.
Use the building area method.
Although there is no formal list of approved simulation tools, there are a few requirements per G2.2.1, including the ability of the program to provide hourly simulation for 8760 hours per year, and model ten or more thermal zones, which PHPP does not meet.
The automated Trace 700 report provides less information than is requested by the Section 1.4 tables spreadsheet. The Section 1.4 tables spreadsheet must be completed.
Assign HVAC systems as per Appendix-G and Section 6 but set thermostatic setpointsSetpoints are normal operating ranges for building systems and indoor environmental quality. When the building systems are outside of their normal operating range, action is taken by the building operator or automation system. out of range so that systems never turn on.
If it is only used for backup and not for regular use such as peak shaving—no.
SHGC is not a mandatory provision so it is available for trade-off and can be higher than the baseline.
You generally wouldn't need to upload any documentation, but particularly for a non-U.S. project, it may help to provide a short narrative about what they are based on.
Discuss your project’s energy performance objectives, along with how those are shaping design decisions, with the owner. Record energy targets in the Owners Project Requirements (OPR) for the commissioning credits EAp1 and EAc3.
You won’t earn this prerequisite by accident. The energy efficiency requirements here are typically much more stringent than local codes, so plan on giving it special attention with your team, including leadership from the owner.
Consider stating goals in terms of minimum efficiency levels and specific payback periods. For example: “Our goal is to exceed a 20% reduction from ASHRAE 90.1, with all efficiency measures having a payback period of 10 years or less.”
Develop a precedent for energy targets by conducting research on similar building types and using the EPA’s Target Finder program. (See Resources.)
For Option 1 only, you will need to comply with the mandatory requirements of ASHRAE 90.1-2007, to bring your project to the minimum level of performance. The ASHRAE 90.1-2007 User’s Manual is a great resource, with illustrated examples of solutions for meeting the requirements.
ASHRAE 90.1-2007 has some additional requirements compared with 2004. Read through the standard for a complete update. The following are some samples.
The prerequisite’s energy-reduction target of 10% is not common practice and is considered beyond code compliance.
Indirect sunlight delievered through clerestories like this helps reduce lighting loads as well as cooling loads. Photo – YRG Sustainability, Project – Cooper Union, New York A poorly designed envelope with a high-tech HVAC system is not, on the whole, efficient or cost-effective. Start with building orientation and passive design features first when looking for energy efficiency. Also look at envelope design, such as energy-efficient windows, walls and roof, before looking at HVAC and plug loads. HVAC may also be a good place to improve performance with more efficient equipment, but first reducing loads with smaller equipment can lead to even greater operational and upfront savings. A poorly designed envelope with a high-tech HVAC system is not, on the whole, efficient or cost-effective.
Don’t plan on using onsite renewable energy generation (see EAc2) to make your building energy-efficient. It is almost always more cost-effective to make an efficient building, and then to add renewables like photovoltaics as the “icing” on the cake.
Some rules of thumb to reduce energy use are:
Find the best credit compliance path based on your building type and energy-efficiency targets. Use the following considerations, noting that some projects are more suited to a prescriptive approach than others.
Option 1: Whole Building Energy Simulation requires estimating the energy use of the whole building over a calendar year, using methodology established by ASHRAE 90.1-2007, Appendix G. Option 1 establishes a computer model of the building’s architectural design and all mechanical, electrical, domestic hot water, plug load, and other energy-consuming systems and devices. The model incorporates the occupancy load and a schedule representing projected usage in order to predict energy use. This compliance path does not prescribe any technology or strategy, but requires a minimum reduction in total energy cost of 10% (5% for an existing building), compared to a baseline building with the same form and design but using systems compliant with ASHRAE 90.1-2007. You can earn additional LEED points through EAc1 for cost reductions of 12% and greater (8% for existing buildings).
Option 2: Prescriptive Compliance Path: ASHRAE Advanced Energy Design Guide refers to design guides published by ASHRAE for office, school, warehouse, and retail projects. These guides outline strategies to reduce energy use by 30% from ASHRAE 90.1-2001 levels, or an amount equivalent to a 10%–14% reduction from the ASHRAE 90.1-2007 standard. If you choose this compliance path, become familiar with the list of prescriptive requirements and commit to meeting them. (See the AEDG checklist in the Documentation Toolkit.)
Option 3: Prescriptive Compliance Path: Advanced Buildings Core Performance Guide is another, more basic prescriptive path. It’s a good option if your project is smaller than 100,000 ft2, cannot pursue Option 2 (because there is not an ASHRAE guide for the building type), is not a healthcare facility, lab, or warehouse—or you would rather not commit to the energy modeling required for Option 1. Your project can be of any other building type (such as office or retail). To meet the prerequisite, you must comply with all requirements within Sections 1 and 2 of the guide. If you choose this path, become familiar with the list of activities and requirements and commit to meeting them. (See Resources for a link to the Core Performance Guide and the Documentation Toolkit for the checklist of prescriptive items.)
EAc1: Optimize Energy Performance uses the same structure of Options 1–3, so it makes sense to think about the credit and the prerequisite together when making your choice. In EAc1, Option 1 offers the potential for far more points than Options 2 and 3, so if you see your project as a likely candidate for earning those points, Option 1 may be best.
Hotels, multifamily residential, and unconventional commercial buildings may not be eligible for either Option 2 or Option 3, because the prescriptive guidance of these paths was not intended for them. Complex projects, unconventional building types, off-grid projects, or those with high energy-reduction goals are better off pursuing Option 1, which provides the opportunity to explore more flexible and innovative efficiency strategies and to trade off high-energy uses for lower ones.
If your project combines new construction and existing building renovation then whatever portion contains more than 50% of the floor area would determine the energy thresholds.
Options 2 and 3 are suitable for small, conventional building types that may not have as much to gain from detailed energy modeling with Option 1.
Meeting the prescriptive requirements of Options 2 and 3 is not common practice and requires a high degree of attention to detail by your project team. (See the Documentation Toolkit for the Core Performance Guide Checklist.) These paths are more straightforward than Option 1, but don’t think of them as easy.
Options 2 and 3 require additional consultant time from architects and MEP engineers over typical design commitment, which means higher upfront costs.
Option 1 references the mandatory requirements of ASHRAE 90.1-2007, which are more stringent than earlier LEED rating systems that referred to ASHRAE 90.1-2004.
Option 1 energy simulation provides monthly and annual operating energy use and cost breakdowns. You can complete multiple iterations, refining energy-efficiency strategies each time. Payback periods can be quickly computed for efficiency strategies using their additional first costs. A building’s life is assumed to be 60 years. A payback period of five years is considered a very good choice, and 10 years is typically considered reasonable. Consult the OPR for your owners’ goals while selecting your efficiency strategies.
Option 1 energy simulation often requires hiring an energy modeling consultant, adding a cost (although this ranges, it is typically on the order of $0.10–$0.50/ft2 depending on the complexity). However, these fees produce high value in terms of design and decision-making assistance, and especially for complex or larger projects can be well worth the investment.
All compliance path options may require both the architectural and engineering teams to take some time in addition to project management to review the prescriptive checklists, fill out the LEED Online credit form, and develop the compliance document.
The architect, mechanical engineer, and lighting designer need to familiarize themselves and confirm compliance with the mandatory requirements of ASHRAE 90.1-2007, sections 5–9.
Use simple computer tools like SketchUp and Green Building Studio that are now available with energy analysis plug-ins to generate a first-order estimate of building energy use within a climate context and to identify a design direction. Note that you may need to refer to different software may not be the one used to develop complete the whole building energy simulations necessary for LEED certification.
Energy modeling can inform your project team from the start of design. Early on, review site climate data—such as temperature, humidity and wind, available from most energy software—as a team. Evaluate the site context and the microclimate, noting the effects of neighboring buildings, bodies of water, and vegetation. Estimate the distribution of energy across major end uses (such as space heating and cooling, lighting, plug loads, hot water, and any additional energy uses), targeting high-energy-use areas to focus on during design.
Use a preliminary energy use breakdown like this one to identify target areas for energy savings.Perform preliminary energy modeling in advance of the schematic design phase kick-off meeting or design charrette. The energy use breakdown can help identify targets for energy savings and point toward possible alternatives.
For existing buildings, the baseline energy model can reflect the pre-renovation features like rather than a minimally ASHRAE-compliant building. This will help you achieve additional savings in comparison with the baseline.
Projects generating renewable energy onsite should use Option 1 to best demonstrate EAp2 compliance and maximize points under EAc1. Other options are possible but won’t provide as much benefit. Like any other project, model the baseline case as a system compliant with ASHRAE 90.1-2007, using grid-connected electricity, and the design case is an “as-designed” system also using grid-connected electricity. You then plug in 100% onsite renewable energy in the final energy-cost comparison table, as required by the performance rating method (PRM) or the modeling protocol of ASHRRAE 90.1 2007, Appendix G. (Refer to the sample PRM tables in the Documentation Toolkit for taking account of onsite renewable energy.
LEED divides energy-using systems into two categories:
Besides energy modeling, you may need to use the exceptional calculation methodology (ECM) when any of the following situations occur:
Some energy-modeling software tools have a daylight-modeling capability. Using the same model for both energy and IEQc8.1: Daylight and Views—Daylight can greatly reduce the cost of your modeling efforts.
Provide a copy of the AEDG for office, retail, or warehouse, as applicable, to each team member as everyone, including the architect, mechanical and electrical engineers, lighting designer, and commissioning agents, are responsible for ensuring compliance. These are available to download free from the ASHRAE website. (See Resources.)
Find your climate zone before attempting to meet any detailed prescriptive requirements. Climate zones vary by county, so be sure to select the right one. (See the Documentation Toolkit for a list of climate zones by county.)
Develop a checklist of all requirements, and assign responsible team members to accomplish them. Hold a meeting to walk the team through the AEDG checklist for your project’s climate zone. Clarify specific design goals and prescriptive requirements in the OPR for EAp1: Fundamental Commissioning.
Early access to the AEDG by each team member avoids last-minute changes that can have cascading, and costly, effects across many building systems.
The AEDG prescriptive requirements include:
If your project team is not comfortable following these guidelines, consider switching to Option 1, which gives you more flexibility.
Although Option 2 is generally lower cost during the design phase than energy modeling, the compliance path is top heavy—it requires additional meeting time upfront for key design members.
Provide a copy of the New Buildings Institute Advanced Buildings: Core Performance Guide to each team member. The guide is available to download free from the NBI website. (See Resources.)
The guide provides practical design assistance that can be used throughout the design process.
Walk your team through the project checklist to clarify design goals and prescriptive requirements.
The guide provides an outline for approaching an energy-efficient design, in addition to a list of prescriptive measures. The first of its three sections emphasizes process and team interaction rather than specific building systems or features. Advise the owner to read through the guide in order to understand what is required of the architect and engineers.
Section 1 in the guide focuses on best practices that benefit the project during the pre-design and schematic design stages, such as analyzing alternative designs and writing the owner’s project requirements (OPR).
Section 2 of the Core Performance Guide describes architectural, lighting, and mechanical systems to be included. Section 3 is not required for EAp2 but includes additional opportunities for energy savings that can earn EAc1 points.
The guide mandates that your team develop a minimum of three different design concepts to select from for best energy use.
Though they can be a little daunting at first glance, a majority of the guide’s requirements overlap with other LEED credits, such as EAp1: Fundamental Commissioning, IEQp1: Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance, and IEQc6.1: Controllability of Systems—Lighting Controls.
This compliance path is top-heavy due to upfront consultant time, but it provides adequate structure to ensure that your project is in compliance with the prerequisite requirements. For some projects it may be less expensive to pursue than Option 1.
The energy model itself will not account for any change in plug loads from the baseline case, even if your project is making a conscious effort to purchase Energy Star or other efficient equipment. Any improvement made in plug loads must be documented separately, using the exceptional calculation methodology (ECM), as described in ASHRAE 90.1-2007. These calculations determine the design case energy cost compared to the baseline case. They are included in the performance rating method (PRM) table or directly in the baseline and design case model.
The owner should now have finalized the OPR with the support of the architect, as part of the commissioning credits EAp1 and EAc3. The goals identified here will help your team identify energy-reduction and occupant-comfort strategies.
Consider a broad range of energy-efficiency strategies and tools, including passive solar, daylighting, cooling-load reduction, and natural ventilation to reduce heating and cooling loads.
Develop the basis of design (BOD) document in conjunction with your mechanical engineer and architect for EAp1: Fundamental Commissioning, noting key design parameters to help strategize design direction as outlined in the OPR.
The OPR and BOD serve the larger purpose of documenting the owner’s vision and your team’s ideas to meet those goals. The BOD is intended to be a work-in-progress and should be updated at all key milestones in your project. Writing the document gives you an opportunity to capture the owner’s goals, whether just to meet the prerequisite or to achieve points under EAc1.
Confirm that your chosen compliance path is the most appropriate for your project, and make any changes now. Following a review with the design team and owner, ensure that everyone is on board with contracting an energy modeler for Option 1 or meeting all the prescriptive requirements under Options 2 or 3.
Sometimes teams change from Option 1 to Options 2 or 3 very late in the design phase for various reasons including not realizing the cost of energy modeling. Making that change is risky, though: the prescriptive paths are all-or-nothing—you must comply with every item, without exception. Evaluate each requirement and consult with the contractor and estimator to ensure the inclusion of all activities within project management.
To avoid costly, last-minute decisions, develop a comprehensive, component-based cost model as a decision matrix for your project. The model will help establish additional cost requirements for each energy conservation measure. It will also illustrate cost reductions from decreased equipment size, construction rendered unnecessary by energy conservation measures, and reduced architectural provisions for space and equipment access. (See the Documentation Toolkit for an example.)
Use envelope design and passive strategies to reduce the heating and cooling loads prior to detailed design of HVAC systems. Passive strategies can reduce heating and cooling loads, giving the engineer more options, including smaller or innovative systems.
Load reduction requires coordinated efforts by all design members including the architect, lighting designer, interior designer, information-technology manager, and owner.
Involving facilities staff in the design process can further inform key design decisions, helping ensure successful operation and low maintenance costs.
Encourage your design team to brainstorm design innovations and energy-reduction strategies. This provides a communication link among team members so they can make informed decisions.
More energy-efficient HVAC equipment can cost more relative to conventional equipment. However, by reducing heating and cooling loads through good passive design, the mechanical engineer can often reduce the size and cost of the system. Reduced system size can save money through:
Review case studies of similar energy-efficient buildings in the same climate to provide helpful hints for selecting energy-efficiency measures. For example, a building in a heating-dominated climate can often benefit from natural ventilation and free cooling during shoulder seasons. (See Resources for leading industry journals showcasing success stories around the country and internationally.)
The relationship between first costs and operating costs can be complex. For example, more efficient windows will be more expensive, but could reduce the size and cost of mechanical equipment. A more efficient HVAC system may be more expensive, but will reduce operating costs. Play around with variables and different strategies to get the right fit for the building and the owner’s goals as stated in the OPR.
Review and confirm compliance with the mandatory requirements of all the relevant sections of ASHRAE 90.1-2007
Trust your project’s energy modeling task to a mechanical firm with a proven track record in using models as design tools, and experience with your building type.
Contract an energy modeling team for the project. These services may be provided by the mechanical engineering firm on the design team or by an outside consultant. Software used for detailed energy use analysis and submitted for final LEED certification must be accepted by the regulatory authority with jurisdiction, and must comply with paragraph G2.2 of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007. Refer to Resources for a list of Department of Energy approved energy-analysis software that may be used for LEED projects.
Design team members, including the architect and mechanical engineer at a minimum, need to work together to identify a percentage improvement goal for project energy use over the ASHRAE 90.1-2007-compliant baseline model. The percentage should be at least 10% to meet the prerequisite.
Plan on initiating energy modeling during the design process, and use it to inform your design—preferably executing several iterations of the design as you improve the modeled energy performance.
Ask the modeling consultant to develop an annual energy-use breakdown—in order to pick the “fattest” targets for energy reduction. A typical energy-use breakdown required for LEED submission and ASHRAE protocol includes:
Identify critical areas in which to reduce loads. For example, in a data center, the plug loads are the largest energy load. Small changes in lighting density might bring down the energy use but represent only a small fraction of annual energy use.
Don't forget that LEED (following ASHRAE) uses energy cost and not straight energy when it compares your design to a base case. That's important because you might choose to use a system that burns natural gas instead of electricity and come out with a lower cost, even though the on-site energy usage in kBtus or kWhs is higher. Generally you have to specify the same fuel in your design case and in the base case, however, so you can't simply switch fuels to show a cost savings
Explore and analyze design alternatives for energy use analyses to compare the cost-effectiveness of your design choices. For example, do you get better overall performance from a better window or from adding a PV panel? Will demand-control ventilation outperform increased ceiling insulation?
Simple, comparative energy analyses of conceptual design forms are useful ways to utilize an energy model at this stage. Sample scenarios include varying the area of east-facing windows and looking at 35% versus 55% glazing. Each scenario can be ranked by absolute energy use to make informed decisions during the design stage.
If your project is using BIM software, the model can be plugged into the energy analysis software to provide quick, real-time results and support better decisions.
Model development should be carried out following the PRM from ASHRAE 90.1-2007, Appendix G, and the LEED 2009 Design and Construction Reference Guide, Table in EAc1 and CS Appendix 2: Energy Modeling Guidelines. In case of a conflict between ASHRAE and LEED guidelines, follow LEED.
Projects using district energy systems have special requirements. For EAp2, the proposed building must achieve the 10% energy savings without counting the effects of the district generation system. To earn points in EAc1 you can take advantage of the district system’s efficiency, but you have to run the energy model again to claim those benefits (see EAc1 for details).
While you could run the required energy model at the end of the design development phase, simply to demonstrate your prerequisite compliance, you don’t get the most value that way in terms of effort and expense. Instead, do it early in the design phase, and run several versions as you optimize your design. Running the model also gives you an opportunity to make improvements if your project finds itself below the required 10% savings threshold.
The baseline model is the designed building with mechanical systems specified in ASHRAE 90.1-2007, Appendix G, for the specific building type, with a window-to-wall ratio at a maximum of 40%, and minimally code-compliant specifications for the envelope, lighting, and mechanical components. It can be developed as soon as preliminary drawings are completed. The baseline is compared to the design case to provide a percentage of reduction in annual energy use. To avoid any bias from orientation, you need to run the baseline model in each of the four primary directions, and the average serves as your final baseline figure.
The design-case is modeled using the schematic design, orientation, and proposed window-to-wall ratio—¬the model will return design-case annual energy costs. Earn points by demonstrating percentage reductions in annual energy costs from the design to the baseline case. EAp2 is achieved if the design case is 10% lower than the baseline in new construction (or 5% less in existing building renovations).
Provide as much project and design detail to the modeler as possible. A checklist is typically developed by the energy modeler, listing all the construction details of the walls, roof, slabs, windows, mechanical systems, equipment efficiencies, occupancy load, and schedule of operations. Any additional relevant information or design changes should be brought to the modeler’s attention as soon as possible. The more realistic the energy model is, the more accurate the energy use figure, leading to better help with your design.
Invite energy modelers to project meetings. An experienced modeler can often assist in decision-making during design meetings, even without running complete models each time.
All known plug loads must be included in the model. The baseline and design-case models assume identical plug loads. If your project is deliberately attempting to reduce plug loads, demonstrate this by following the exceptional calculation method (ECM), as described in ASHRAE 90.1-2007, G2.5. Incorporate these results in the model to determine energy savings.
For items outside the owner’s control—like lighting layout, fans and pumps—the parameters for the design and baseline models must be identical.
It can take anywhere from a few days to a few weeks to generate meaningful energy modeling results. Schedule the due dates for modeling results so that they can inform your design process.
Review the rate structure from your electrical utility. The format can inform your team of the measures likely to be most effective in reducing energy costs, especially as they vary over season, peak load, and additional charges beyond minimum energy use.
Performing a cost-benefit analysis in conjunction with energy modeling can determine payback times for all the energy strategies, helping the iterative design process.
Using energy modeling only to check compliance after the design stage wastes much of the value of the service, and thus your investment.
The architect and mechanical engineer should carefully read the applicable ASHRAE Advanced Energy Design Guide for office, warehouse, or retail projects, as applicable.
Keep the owner abreast of the design decisions dictated by the standard. Fill in the team-developed checklist, within the climate zone table’s prescribed requirements, with appropriate envelope improvements, system efficiencies, and a configuration that meets the standard requirements.
As a prescriptive path, this option relies heavily on following the requirement checklist, which is used throughout the design process to track progress. To assist design development, provide all critical team members—not limited to the architect, mechanical and electrical engineers, and lighting designer—with a checklist highlighting their appointed tasks.
The architect, mechanical engineer, and lighting designer need to discuss each requirement and its design ramifications. Hold these meetings every six to eight weeks to discuss progress and make sure all requirements are being met.
Core and Shell projects must mandate the requirements for the tenant spaces within a tenant guideline document such as one developed for SSc9: Tenant Design and Construction Guidelines.
Confirm that your project team is comfortable with following all the prescribed requirements. If not, switch to Option 1: Whole Building Energy Simulation.
The LEED Online credit form does not specify how to document each prescriptive requirement because they are so different for each project; it only requires a signed confirmation by the MEP for meeting AEDG requirements. You still have to provide documentation. Submit your checklist of requirements, and supporting information for each item, through LEED Online to make your case. If your project fails to meet even one requirement, it will fail to earn the prerequisite, thus jeopardizing LEED certification.
Although energy modeling consultant costs are avoided by this option, additional staff time will be required to document and track compliance status, as compared with conventional projects.
Energy efficiency measures prescribed by the guide can be perceived as additional costs in comparison with conventional projects. However, they are easy to implement and are cost-effective pn the whole.
Become familiar with the Core Performance Guide early in the design phase to know the multiple requirements and all requisite documents.
Note that the guide demands additional time, attention, and integrated process from the design team as compared to conventional projects. It’s not just a list of prescriptive requirements, but a prescribed process for achieving energy efficiency goals. LEED Online documentation requires proof of all steps outlined in Sections 1 and 2, including three conceptual design options and meeting minutes. The project manager, architect, and mechanical engineer should read the complete Core Performance Guide carefully to know beforehand the prescriptive requirements in Sections 1 and 2.
The project manager must take responsibility for ensuring that the requirement checklist is on track.
For Section 3, the design team needs to identify three or more of the listed strategies as possible targets for the project.
Create a checklist of requirements and assign a responsible party to each item.
The Core Performance Guide requires an integrated design contributed by the architect, mechanical and electrical engineers, and lighting designer. The project manager must take responsibility for shepherding and documenting the collaborative process to demonstrate compliance.
A long documentation list can be overwhelming for your team, so create a detailed checklist with tasks delegated to individual team members, allowing each member to focus on assigned tasks. The checklist can function as a status tracking document and, finally, the deliverable for LEED Online.
The architect and engineer, and other project team members, continue to develop a high-performance building envelope with efficient mechanical and lighting systems.
Constant communication and feedback among project team members, owner, and if possible, operational staff, during design development can minimize construction as well as operational costs and keep your project on schedule.
If you change or go through value-engineering on any specifications, such as the solar-heat gain coefficient of glazing, for example, be aware of impacts on mechanical system sizing. Making changes like this might not pay off as much as it first appears.
Consider using building information modeling (BIM) tools to keep design decisions up to date and well documented for all team members.
Schedule delays can be avoided if all team members share their ideas and update documents during the design development process.
The modeler completes the energy analysis of the selected design and system and offers alternative scenarios for discussion. The modeler presents the energy cost reduction results to the team, identifying the LEED threshold achieved.
It’s helpful for the energy modeling report to include a simple payback analysis to assist the owner in making an informed decision on the operational savings of recommended features.
Demonstrating reductions in non-regulated loads requires a rigorous definition of the baseline case. The loads must be totally equivalent, in terms of functionality, to the proposed design case. For example, reducing the number of computers in the building does not qualify as a legitimate reduction in non-regulated loads. However, the substitution of laptops for desktop computers, and utilization of flat-screen displays instead of CRTs for the same number of computers, may qualify as a reduction.
Residential and hospitality projects that use low-flow showers, lavatories, and kitchen sinks (contributing to WEp1) benefit from lower energy use due to reduced overall demand for hot water. However, for energy-savings calculations, these are considered process loads that must be modeled as identical in baseline and design cases, or you have the choice of demonstrating the savings with ECM for process loads.
Perform daylight calculations in conjunction with energy modeling to balance the potentially competing goals of more daylight versus higher solar-heat gain resulting in high cooling loads.
If your project is pursuing renewable energy, the energy generated is accounted for by using the PRM. These results provide information about whether the energy is contributing to EAc2: Onsite Renewable Energy.
A cost-benefit analysis can help the owner understand the return on investment of big-ticket, energy-conserving equipment that lowers operating energy bills with a quick payback.
Complete at least half of the energy modeling effort by the end of the design development stage. Help the design team to finalize strategy through intensive, early efforts in energy modeling. Once the team has a design direction, the modeler can develop a second model during the construction documents phase for final confirmation.
If pursuing ECM for non-regulated loads, calculate energy saving for each measure separately if you are, for example, installing an energy-efficient elevator instead of a typical one so that the reduction would contribute to total building energy savings. Calculate the anticipated energy use of the typical elevator in kBTUs or kWh. Using the same occupancy load, calculate the energy use of the efficient elevator. Incorporate the savings into design case energy use within the PRM. Refer to the ECM strategy for detailed calculation guidelines.
Ensure that all prescriptive requirements are incorporated into the design by the end of the design development stage.
Revisit the Advanced Energy Design Guides (AEDG) checklist to ensure that the design meets the prescriptive requirements.
The mechanical engineer, lighting consultant, and architect revisit the checklist for an update on the requirements and how they are being integrated into the design. All prescriptive requirements should be specifically incorporated into the design by the end of the design development phase.
The mechanical engineer and architect track the status of each requirement.
While the LEED Online credit form does not require detailed documentation for each Core Performance Guide requirement, it is important that each item be documented as required and reviewed by the rest of the team to confirm compliance, especially as further documentation may be requested by during review. Your design team should work with the owner to identify cost-effective strategies from Section 3 that can be pursued for the project.
The architect and HVAC engineer should agree on the design, working with the cost estimator and owner.
Construction documents clearly detail the architectural and mechanical systems that address energy-efficiency strategies.
Confirm that specifications and the bid package integrate all equipment and activities associated with the project.
If the project goes through value engineering, refer to the OPR and BOD to ensure that no key comfort, health, productivity, daylight, or life-cycle cost concerns are sacrificed.
During the budget estimating phase, the project team may decide to remove some energy-saving strategies that have been identified as high-cost items during the value-engineering process. However, it is very important to help the project team understand that these so-called add-ons are actually integral to the building’s market value and the owner’s goals.
Removing an atrium, for example, due to high cost may provide additional saleable floor area, but may also reduce daylight penetration while increasing the lighting and conditioning loads.
Although this prerequisite is a design-phase submittal, it may make sense to submit it, along with EAc1, after construction. Your project could undergo changes during construction that might compel a new run of the energy model to obtain the latest energy-saving information. Waiting until the completion of construction ensures that the actual designed project is reflected in your energy model.
Create a final energy model based completely on construction document drawings—to confirm actual energy savings as compared to ASHRAE 90.1-2007 requirements. An energy model based on the construction documents phase will provide realistic energy-cost savings and corresponding LEED points likely to be earned.
Make sure the results fit the LEED Online credit form requirements. For example, the unmet load hours have to be less than 300 and process loads will raise a red flag if they’re not approximately 25%. If any of the results are off mark, take time to redo the model. Time spent in design saves more later on in the LEED review process.
Finalize all design decisions and confirm that you’ve met all of the prescriptive requirements. Your team must document the checklist with relevant project drawings, including wall sections, specifications, and the MEP drawing layout.
Value engineering and other factors can result in design changes that eliminate certain energy features relevant to the prerequisite. As this compliance path is prescriptive, your project cannot afford to drop even one prescribed item.
Value engineering and other factors can result in design changes that eliminate certain energy features relevant to the credit. As this compliance path is prescriptive, your project cannot afford to drop even one listed item. Although perceived as high-cost, prescriptive requirements lower energy costs during operation and provide a simple payback structure.
The architect and mechanical engineer review the shop drawings to confirm the installation of the selected systems.
The commissioning agent and the contractor conduct functional testing of all mechanical equipment in accordance with EAp1: Fundamental Commissioning and EAc3: Enhanced Commissioning.
Find your Energy Star rating with EPA’s Target Finder tool if your building type is in the database. Input your project location, size, and number of occupants, computers, and kitchen appliances. The target may be a percentage energy-use reduction compared to a code-compliant building, or “anticipated energy use” data from energy model results. Add information about your fuel use and rate, then click to “View Results.” Your Target Finder score should be documented at LEED Online.
Plan for frequent site visits by the mechanical designer and architect during construction and installation to make sure construction meets the design intent and specifications.
Emphasize team interaction and construction involvement when defining the project scope with key design team members. Contractor and designer meetings can help ensure correct construction practices and avoid high change-order costs for the owner.
Subcontractors may attempt to add a premium during the bidding process for any unusual or unknown materials or practices, so inform your construction bidders of any atypical design systems at the pre-bid meeting.
The energy modeler ensures that any final design changes have been incorporated into the updated model.
Upon finalizing of the design, the responsible party or energy modeler completes the LEED Online submittal with building design inputs and a PRM result energy summary.
Although EAp2 is a design phase submittals, it may make sense to submit it (along with EAc1) after construction. Your project could undergo changes during construction that might require a new run of the energy model. Waiting until the completion of construction ensures that your actual designed project is reflected. On the other hand, it gives you less opportunity to respond to questions that might come up during a LEED review.
Include supporting documents like equipment cut sheets, specifications and equipment schedules to demonstrate all energy efficiency measures claimed in the building.
It common for the LEED reviewers to make requests for more information. Go along with the process—it doesn’t mean that you’ve lost the credit. Provide as much information for LEED Online submittal as requested and possible.
The design team completes the LEED Online documentation, signing off on compliance with the applicable AEDG, and writing the narrative report on the design approach and key highlights.
During LEED submission, the project team needs to make an extra effort to support the prerequisite with the completed checklist and the required documents. Although the LEED rating system does not list detailed documentation, it is best practice to send in supporting documents for the prescriptive requirements from the AEDG. The supporting documents should include relevant narratives, wall sections, mechanical drawings, and calculations.
Although the LEED Online sign-off does not include a checklist of AEDG requirements, it assumes that the team member is confirming compliance with all detailed requirements of the guide.
The design team completes the LEED Online credit form, signing off on compliance with the Core Performance Guide, and writing the narrative report on the design approach and key highlights.
During LEED submission, your project team needs to make an extra effort to support the prerequisite with the completed checklist and the required documents. Although not every requirement may be mentioned in the LEED documentation, the supporting documents need to cover all requirements with narratives, wall sections, mechanical drawings, and calculations.
Many of this option’s compliance documents are common to other LEED credits or design documents, thus reducing duplicated efforts.
Develop an operations manual with input from the design team in collaboration with facility management and commissioning agent if pursuing EAc3: Enhanced Commissioning.
The benefit of designing for energy efficiency is realized only during operations and maintenance. Record energy use to confirm that your project is saving energy as anticipated. If you are not pursuing EAc5: Measurement and Verification, you can implement tracking procedures such as reviewing monthly energy bills or on-the-spot metering.
Some energy efficiency features may require special training for operations and maintenance personnel. For example, cogeneration and building automation systems require commissioning and operator training. Consider employing a trained professional to aid in creating operation manuals for specialty items.
Energy-efficiency measures with a higher first cost often provide large savings in energy use and operational energy bills. These credit requirements are directly tied to the benefits of efficient, low-cost operations.
Excerpted from LEED 2009 for Core and Shell Development
To establish the minimum level of energy efficiency for the proposed building and systems to reduce environmental and economic impacts associated with excessive energy use.
Demonstrate a 10% improvement in the proposed building performance rating for new buildings, or a 5% improvement in the proposed building performance rating for major renovations to existing buildings, compared with the baseline building performanceBaseline building performance is the annual energy cost for a building design, used as a baseline for comparison with above-standard design. rating.
Calculate the baseline building performance rating according to the building performance rating method in Appendix G of ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007 (with errata but without addenda1) using a computer simulation model for the whole building project. Projects outside the U.S. may use a USGBC approved equivalent standard2.
Appendix G of Standard 90.1-2007 requires that the energy analysis done for the building performance rating method include all energy costs associated with the building project. To achieve points using this credit, the proposed design must meet the following criteria:
For the purpose of this analysis, process energy is considered to include, but is not limited to, office and general miscellaneous equipment, computers, elevators and escalators,kitchen cooking and refrigeration, laundry washing and drying, lighting exempt from the lighting power allowance (e.g., lighting integral to medical equipment) and other (e.g., waterfall pumps).
Regulated (non-process) energy includes lighting (for the interior, parking garage, surface parking, façade, or building grounds, etc. except as noted above), heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) (for space heating, space cooling, fans, pumps, toilet exhaust, parking garage ventilation, kitchen hood exhaust, etc.), and service water heating for domestic or space heating purposes.
Process loads must be identical for both the baseline building performance rating and the proposed building performance rating. However, project teams may follow the exceptional calculation method (ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007 G2.5) or USGBC approved equivalent to document measures that reduce process loads. Documentation of process load energy savings must include a list of the assumptions made for both the base and the proposed design, and theoretical or empirical information supporting these assumptions.
Projects in California may use Title 24-2005, Part 6 in place of ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007 for Option 1.
Comply with the prescriptive measures of the ASHRAE Advanced Energy Design Guide appropriate to the project scope, outlined below. Project teams must comply with all applicable criteria as established in the Advanced Energy Design Guide for the climate zoneOne of five climatically distinct areas, defined by long-term weather conditions which affect the heating and cooling loads in buildings. The zones were determined according to the 45-year average (1931-1975) of the annual heating and cooling degree-days (base 65 degrees Fahrenheit). An individual building was assigned to a climate zone according to the 45-year average annual degree-days for its National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Division. in which the building is located. Projects outside the U.S. may use ASHRAE/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007 Appendices B and D to determine the appropriate climate zone.
The building must meet the following requirements:
Comply with the prescriptive measures identified in the Advanced Buildings™ Core Performance™ Guide developed by the New Buildings Institute. The building must meet the following requirements:
Projects outside the U.S. may use ASHRAE/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007 Appendices B and D to determine the appropriate climate zone.
1Project teams wishing to use ASHRAE approved addenda for the purposes of this prerequisite may do so at their discretion. Addenda must be applied consistently across all LEED credits.
2 Projects outside the U.S. may use an alternative standard to ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007 if it is approved by USGBC as an equivalent standard using the process located at www.usgbc.org/leedisglobal
Design the building envelope and systems to meet baseline requirements. Use a computer simulation model to assess the energy performance and identify the most cost-effective energy efficiency measures. Quantify energy performance compared with a baseline building.
If local code has demonstrated quantitative and textual equivalence following, at a minimum, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) standard process for commercial energy code determination, then the results of that analysis may be used to correlate local code performance with ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007. Details on the DOE process for commercial energy code determination can be found at http://www.energycodes.gov/implement/ determinations_com.stm.
1 Project teams wishing to use ASHRAE approved addenda for the purposes of this prerequisite may do so at their discretion. Addenda must be applied consistently across all LEED credits.
2 Projects outside the U.S. may use an alternative standard to ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1‐2007 if it is approved by USGBC as an equivalent standard using the process located at www.usgbc.org/leedisglobal
Useful web resource with information on local/regional incentives for energy-efficiency programs.
This database shows state-by-state incentives for energy efficiency, renewable energy, and other green building measures. Included in this database are incentives on demand control ventilation, ERVs, and HRVs.
ACEEE is a nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing energy efficiency through technical and policy assessments; advising policymakers and program managers; collaborating with businesses, public interest groups, and other organizations; and providing education and outreach through conferences, workshops, and publications.
The New Buildings Institute is a nonprofit, public-benefits corporation dedicated to making buildings better for people and the environment. Its mission is to promote energy efficiency in buildings through technology research, guidelines, and codes.
The Building Energy Codes program provides comprehensive resources for states and code users, including news, compliance software, code comparisons, and the Status of State Energy Codes database. The database includes state energy contacts, code status, code history, DOE grants awarded, and construction data. The program is also updating the COMcheck-EZ compliance tool to include ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1–2007. This compliance tool includes the prescriptive path and trade-off compliance methods. The software generates appropriate compliance forms as well.
Research center at RPI provides access to a wide range of daylighting resources, case studies, design tools, reports, publications and more.
International association of energy modelers with various national and local chapters.
Non-profit organization aiming at design community to increase collaboration for designing energy efficient buildings.
The Low Impact Hydropower Institute is a non-profit organization and certification body that establishes criteria against which to judge the environmental impacts of hydropower projects in the United States.
The Building Technologies Program (BTP) provides resources for commercial and residential building components, energy modeling tools, building energy codes, and appliance standards including the Buildings Energy Data Book, High Performance Buildings Database and Software Tools Directory.
This website discusses the step-by-step process for energy modeling.
This online resource, supported by Natural Resources Canada, presents energy-efficient technologies, strategies for commercial buildings, and pertinent case studies.
This website is a comprehensive resource for U.S. Department of Energy information on energy efficiency and renewable energy and provides access to energy links and downloadable documents.
Information on cogenerationThe simultaneous production of electric and thermal energy in on-site, distributed energy systems; typically, waste heat from the electricity generation process is recovered and used to heat, cool, or dehumidify building space. Neither generation of electricity without use of the byproduct heat, nor waste-heat recovery from processes other than electricity generation is included in the definition of cogeneration., also called combined heat and power, is available from EPA through the CHPCombined heat and power (CHP), or cogeneration, generates both electrical power and thermal energy from a single fuel source. Partnership. The CHP Partnership is a voluntary program seeking to reduce the environmental impact of power generation by promoting the use of CHP. The Partnership works closely with energy users, the CHP industry, state and local governments, and other clean energy stakeholders to facilitate the development of new projects and to promote their environmental and economic benefits.
Free download of AHSRAE energy savings guide, use for Option 2.
Research warehouse for strategies and case studies of energy efficiency in buildings.
An online window selection tool with performance characteristics.
This website lays out design process for developing an energy efficient building.
This website discusses ways to improve design for lower energy demand as they relate to the AIA 2030 challenge.
This website includes discussion of design issues, materials and assemblies, window design decisions and case studies.
This site lists multiple web-based and downloadable tools that can be used for energy analyses.
This database is maintainted by the California Energy Commission and lists resources related to energy use and efficiency.
Energy design tools are available to be used for free online or available to download.
This website lists performance characteristics for various envelope materials.
This is an online forum of discussion for energy efficiency, computer model software users.
Target Finder is a goal-setting tool that informs your design team about their project’s energy performance as compared to a national database of projects compiled by the EPA.
This directory provides information on 406 building software tools for evaluating energy efficiency, renewable energy, and sustainability in buildings.
Weather data for more than 2100 locations are available in EnergyPlus weather format.
Weather data for U.S. and Non-U.S. locations in BIN format.
A web-based, free content project by IBPSA-USA to develop an online compendium of the domain of Building Energy Modeling (BEM). The intention is to delineate a cohesive body of knowledge for building energy modeling.
A guide for achieving energy efficiency in new commercial buildings, referenced in the LEED energy credits.
This manual is a strategic guide for planning and implementing energy-saving building upgrades. It provides general methods for reviewing and adjusting system control settings, plus procedures for testing and correcting calibration and operation of system components such as sensors, actuators, and controlled devices.
This manual offers guidance to building energy modelers, ensuring technically rigorous and credible assessment of energy performance of commercial and multifamily residential buildings. It provides a streamlined process that can be used with various existing modeling software and systems, across a range of programs.
Chapter 19 is titled, “Energy Estimating and Modeling Methods”. The chapter discusses methods for estimating energy use for two purposes: modeling for building and HVAC system design and associated design optimization (forward modeling), and modeling energy use of existing buildings for establishing baselines and calculating retrofit savings (data-driven modeling).
Required reference document for DES systems in LEED energy credits.
ASHRAE writes standards for the purpose of establishing consensus for: 1) methods of test for use in commerce and 2) performance criteria for use as facilitators with which to guide the industry.
Energy statistics from the U.S. government.
This guide includes instructional graphics and superior lighting design solutions for varying types of buildings and spaces, from private offices to big box retail stores.
This website offers information on energy efficiency in buildings, highlighting success stories, breakthrough technology, and policy updates.
Bimonthly publication on case studies and new technologies for energy efficiency in commercial buildings.
AIA publication highlighting local and state green building incentives.
2008 guidelines and performance goals from the National Science and Technology Council.
Information about energy-efficient building practices available in EDR's Design Briefs, Design Guidelines, Case Studies, and Technology Overviews.
DOE tools for whole building analyses, including energy simulation, load calculation, renewable energy, retrofit analysis and green buildings tools.
This is a computer program that predicts the one-dimensional transfer of heat and moisture.
DesignBuilder is a Graphical User Interface to EnergyPlus. DesignBuilder is a complete 3-D graphical design modeling and energy use simulation program providing information on building energy consumption, CO2Carbon dioxide emissions, occupant comfort, daylighting effects, ASHRAE 90.1 and LEED compliance, and more.
IES VE Pro is an integrated computing environment encompassing a wide range of tasks in building design including model building, energy/carbon, solar, light, HVAC, climate, airflow, value/cost and egress.
Use this checklist of prescriptive requirements (with sample filled out) to have an at-a-glance picture of AEDG requirements for Option 2, and how your project is meeting them.
This spreadsheet lists all the requirements for meeting EAp2 – Option 3 and and EAc1 – Option 3. You can review the requirements, assign responsible parties and track status of each requirement through design and construction.
Sometimes the energy simulation software being used to demonstrate compliance with Option 1 doesn't allow you to simulate key aspects of the design. In this situation you'll need to write a short sample narrative, as in these examples, describing the situation and how it was handled.
In your supporting documentation, include spec sheets of equipment described in the Option 1 energy model or Options 2–3 prescriptive paths.
This is a sample building energy performance and cost summary using the Performance Rating Method (PRM). Electricity and natural gas use should be broken down by end uses including space heating, space cooling, lights, task lights, ventilation fans, pumps, and domestic hot water, at the least.
Option 1 calculates savings in annual energy cost, but utility prices may vary over the course of a year. This sample demonstrates how to document varying electricity tariffs.
This graph, for an office building design, shows how five overall strategies were implemented to realize energy savings of 30% below an ASHRAE baseline. (From modeling conducted by Synergy Engineering, PLLC.)
The climate zones shown on this Department of Energy map are relevant to all options for this credit.
This spreadsheet, provided here by 7group, can be used to calculate the fan volume and fan power for Appendix G models submitted for EAp2/EAc1. Tabs are included to cover both ASHRAE 90.1-2004 and 90.1-2007 Appendix G methodologies.
The following links take you to the public, informational versions of the dynamic LEED Online forms for each CS-2009 EA credit. You'll need to fill out the live versions of these forms on LEED
Online for each credit you hope to earn.
These links are posted by LEEDuser with USGBC's permission. USGBC has certain usage restrictsions for these forms; for more information, visit LEED Online and click "Sample Forms Download."
Documentation for this credit can be part of a Design Phase submittal.
I'm working in a C&S project where I have a partial desing of Air conditioned. The owner will give cold water and outdoor air in each tenant spaceTenant space is the area within the LEED project boundary. For more information on what can and must be in the LEED project boundary see the Minimum Program Requirements (MPRs) and LEED 2009 MPR Supplemental Guidance. Note: tenant space is the same as project space.. The desing has supply outdoor air fans completly designed but the tenant must install the interior unit (Fan coil or air handler), therefore, I don't have the desing of the interior units.
How should I simulate the Fan power in the proposed model?
Thanks for you advice.
Identical to the Baseline is the simple answer.
If your baseline is chilled water then it is straight forward. If your baseline is DX I would use the DES guidance for the baseline system selection.
I am in the same situation, I am in a conflict about how to model the VAVVariable Air Volume (VAV) is an HVAC conservation feature that supplies varying quantities of conditioned (heated or cooled) air to different parts of a building according to the heating and cooling needs of those specific areas. systems in each floor and the supply outdoor air fan designed.
VAV system supply outdoor air in the baseline, but my proposed will be supplied by fans, that are just a big one.
My question is How do i need to model the supplied outdoor air?
Modeling a DES system after Option 2, we got the energy consumption and prices from the DES. With these we calculate our virtual rates according to 2.4.2.
The DES uses a mix of gas, coal, waste and oil.
My questions: 1. In my understanding, the DES guide is a bit short on which energy type should be used in the baseline. Yet we used gas as it was the main energy source of the DES.
2. The DES operater provided us with his gas procurement costs which are nearly half of the average gas prize for commercial customers. I would like to argue that only the DES is able to get such a low prize due to its high consumption and therefore use the actual (low) gas prize in the DES virtual rate and the average gas prize for commercial customers in the baseline case.
Would be great to get your thoughts on this!
1. You should use the same fuel mix for the baseline central plant.
2. You can try to argue that point but Appendix G and the DES are pretty clear that the rates must be identical in both models.
The project at hand is ~500,000 sf and contains 4 buildings, each with 2 sub-floors, a ground floor, and between 4 and 11 stories and a district heating source. We are using the Application Guide for Multiple Buildings and the project has a Master Site, 1 block registration, and 1 single building registration. It is clear we need to demonstrate each buildings individual compliance, but we have the following questions: 1) Does each building need to be individually modeled with and without the district heating plant to demonstrate compliance; 2) Do EAp2 and EAc1 submittal forms need to be submitted for each building within the group; and 3) As the project is quite large our idea is to create a representative energy model by building out the geometry of the floors that are different, but then just multiplying the energy use of the floors that are identical rather than putting between 3 and 9 identical floors into the model - would this be acceptable to meet prerequisite and credit requirements?
1. No you do not need to model it both ways. If following the DES guidance pick either option 1 or option 2.
2. For EAp2 a separate form for each building would be needed to evaluate compliance. For EAc1 I would assume you add the energy use for all and then determine the percentage achieved for the points.
3. You do need to model the whole building. Modeling identical floors is usually pretty easy as the modeling software I am familiar with has a way to automatically recreate identical floors.
a little question about the definition of "conditioned space". I have some spaces wich are not occupied and unconditioned (for exemple storage or technical spaces): do i have to consider them conditioned spaces according to the definition in section 3 of ASHRAE 90.1, and consequently to simulate a cooling/heating system in both baseline and proposed building?
Thank you in advance!
Technically you are supposed to do so according to Table G3.1.1-10 Proposed (c&dConstruction and demolition). The work around is to set the temperatures in those spaces so that the systems never operate. Given the waste of time it would be to model a system that does not operate we do not include systems in these kinds of spaces.
thanks for the reply.
I totally agree with you, but my question comes from a technical review for a certification.
In your opinion is it better to modify the simulation introducing these systems (and not to make them actually work) or simply justify as you have explained?
Thank you very much!
We don't model non-existent systems if it is just small spaces within the building. The reviewer would likely not even notice and we would address the issue if asked and provide an explanation.
If we run into this situation in a large space where the lack of a system would get noticed, we would likely submit a narrative explanation for why we did not model a system (raising the points above).
So we would usually justify our position unless the reviewer sounded particularly insistent on including the systems and wasting our time.
Bottom line is which way takes more time - modeling the non-existent systems or writing a few sentences.
Clear and comprehensive as usual!
Thank you Marcus!
do you think that this narrative could be appropriate?
" We confirm that there are 268.195 square feet of unconditioned area as per the definition in Section 3 of Asharae 90.1-2007. These areas are technical risers, lift risers and storage that do not require any temperature control or outside air according to Italian Regulation".
Thank you very much!
One suggestion is related to the term risers. We use the term riser to refer to the MEP content like an electrical riser diagram. When referring to the spaces or areas within which those materials are housed we call that a shaft. I am guessing you mean shafts which are the openings the MEP stuff goes into like the elevator shafts and the duct shafts.
Is that 268 thousand square feet? If so that is a pretty big area. The fact that Italian regulation does not require conditioning this unconditioned space is probably not relevant beyond the fact that that is why it was not included in the proposed design.
The justification for not modeling heating and cooling in these spaces is that Appendix G only requires heating/cooling for conditioned spaces (see Table G3.1-1 Proposed (b) (you could cite this in your narrative). So I may have somewhat mislead you originally. If they are truly unconditioned then you do not need to model heating/cooling at all. You might want to explain the storage space a bit so the reviewer understands why it does not require any conditioning.
Can a warehouse without HVAC systems qualify for Certification?
Look at the Minimum Program Requirements first. If it can meet all of them then evaluate the project in the context of LEED credit-by-credit to see if it can meet the prerequisites and earn enough points.
ASHRAE 90.1, section 9 does not apply to lighting within dwelling unit as stated in 9.1.1 footnotes. Table 9.5.1 include LPDLighting power density (LPD) is the amount of electric lighting, usually measured in watts per square foot, being used to illuminate a given space. allowance for multifamily building. Is this LDP allowance apply to enitre multifamily high rise building area that exclude dwelling unit area?
It applies to the whole building I think.
While dwelling unit lighting is not regulated as a prescriptive requirement it is included in tables 9.5.1 and 9.6.1.
Since LPDLighting power density (LPD) is the amount of electric lighting, usually measured in watts per square foot, being used to illuminate a given space. for dwelling unit is not regulated, i assume LPD allowance (from Table 9.5.1) for multifamily building applied to all other space (corridor, lobby, etc.) other than dwelling unit in a multifamily high rise building.
As energy modeling purpose, LPD for dwelling unit shall be identical in proposed and baseline case.
ASHREA 90.1, Table G3.1 6d) exception states "For multifamily dwelling unit...., assume identical lighting power for the proposed and baseline building designs in the simulations."
Appreciate if any idea.
I do not think that assumption is correct. The LPDLighting power density (LPD) is the amount of electric lighting, usually measured in watts per square foot, being used to illuminate a given space. in 9.5.1 does include the whole building and must be applied to the whole building.
It is correct that the dwelling unit lighting is technically not regulated and therefore should be identical. You might look beyond 90.1 for guidance on this issue. There were some LEED Interpretations on this issue that you should look up to see if they may still apply. Not sure if the Reference Guide addresses the issue.
The Advanced Energy Modeling Guide for LEED does contain some guidance on this issue. Like any non-regulated load - if you want to claim savings it is up to you to establish the baseline and demonstrate savings against it.
Hello, I am filling in my EAp2 template under LEED 2009 for Healthcare. Under Section 1.3 Advisory Messages, it says that I can find the data for this table in my Energy Pro outputs. However, neither I or my LEED fascilitator can locate this data anywhere in my Energy Model outputs. Can someone tell me where I can find the data to fill in this table? I thank you in advance for your help. All else in the template is complete and time is of the esscence. Thanks
Since EnergyPro is a DOE2 product this information will be in your .sim file. The warning and errors are in the beginning and the unmet load hours are in the SS-E reports and the totals are on the BEPU and BEPS reports. If you still see hours outside throttling range multiply this percentage times 8760 to get your unmet load hours.
Not sure if EnergyPro provides a report that gives you this information.
Thank you very much. Found the .sim file. I will peruse it to find the info.
It opens in Word but then requires some reformatting.
We are pursuing Option 1 (Whole Building Simulation). In the Proposed Case we modelled the part load performance of the chiller based on the part load performance values (fraction of Full-Load Power values) at Fan Part-Load Ratio of the manufacturer datasheet.
It is unclear for me how to determine the part load performance for the Baseline Case as I could not find respective values (e.g. COP at 25/50/75%) or a graph as provided for the VAVVariable Air Volume (VAV) is an HVAC conservation feature that supplies varying quantities of conditioned (heated or cooled) air to different parts of a building according to the heating and cooling needs of those specific areas. system in G184.108.40.206.
Use the default curve in the software for the type of equipment you are modeling in the baseline.
We are computing energy performance for a major renovation project in the context of Core&Shell.
Modeling the proposed building model we are realizing some difficulties modeling the total building as demanded in LEED 2009 MPR.
The major renovation is carried out for approx. 70% of the building.
The 3 basement floors and the first floor of the scyscraper building will persist unchanged.
The narrow side of the building façade will persist unchanged too.
All floors above the first floor shall be renovated (HVAC, exterior wall, windows, roof, lighting).
The building standard of the 50 years old building (HVAC, construction, lighting) is mostly unknown. Documentation is very fragmentary and examination of the whole building is not very practicable.
So how should we model the HVAC, construction, lighting of the remaining part of the building which persist unchanged.
1) Should we use HVAC of basement building ?
2) Should we use construction of basement building ?
3) Should we use lighting of basement building ?
Is there any hint in ASHRAE 90.1-2007 App. G or the LEED Core&Shell guide ?
Has there been similar discussion in this board before ?
Thanks in advance.
There has been some debate on this issue.
The Standard itself is silent on the issue except for the envelope (see Table G3.1.#5 Baseline (f)). So this would be an indication that you would model the non-renovated portions of the building as they exist for the proposed and model the entire baseline according to Appendix G (except for the envelope, see Table G3.1.#5 Baseline (f).
The User's Manual indicates that the existing HVAC conditions should be modeled identically in the baseline and proposed (page G-21).
No guidance is provided for the other building systems beyond HVAC and envelope.
Personally I think it is most fair to model the existing conditions in both but I can see the point raised by the other approach. Sorry I do not have definitive guidance. The conservative approach is the first one so that is most likely to be accepted by the reviewer.
You should get the information you need to do the model as accurately as possible in the most efficient manner possible. If the existing building is not recently documented then someone will need to survey it to determine the existing conditions.
Thanks for your quick reply Marcus.
So my conclusion to the final part of your comment:
If there is no complete survey of existing construction, HVAC and lighting of the non-renovated part of the building we cannot use energy modeling to demonstrate energy performance of major renovation for LEED Core&Shell.
Am I right ?
Yes, you would need to model the existing conditions and in order to do so you must know those existing conditions. If surveying the existing building is the only way to get that information then yes you would need to survey the building. Without this information you can't do the modeling.
Requirements according to ASHRAE mandatory provision 5.4:
Cargo doors and loading dock doors shall be equipped with weather seals to restrict infiltration when vehicles are parked to doorway.
In our project there will be an open loading dock where several (two or more) trucks can dock at the same time and from the platform transport goods to the stores. During unloading the loading dock door (one) will be open.
Can we find compliance with another strategy, e.g. use double doors where one is always closed to prevent infiltration? Another method we considered is to use some kind of air curtains.
I think that this mandatory provision only really applies to doors that a truck could back up to. If the facility has an outdoor loading dock then the trucks cannot be "parked in the doorway" and this provision would not apply.
Those may be good ideas to reduce infiltration. If you implement them you should probably claim any savings under the exceptional calculation method since infiltration must be identical in both models.
If facade lighting are installed at the perimeter inside the building, should this be considered interior or exterior LPDLighting power density (LPD) is the amount of electric lighting, usually measured in watts per square foot, being used to illuminate a given space.?
These lights will be controlled / operated by the base building and energy consumption will not be billed to the tenants.
Not sure. I would need to know much more about the installation to offer an opinion.
Thanks for your response Marcus.
Once installed the lighting effect would be like "Water Cube" in China. please see refer to this link:
I also tried to check how 90.1 describes an interior and exterior lignting "lighting power allowance", it doesnt really say anything about its purpose to determine if it's interior or exterior.
Since the lighting illuminates the facade I would say that it is exterior facade lighting. I think the bottom line is not determined based on where the fixtures are located but by the task to be served by the fixtures.
Our proposed building has no cooling system installed; it is ventilated naturally. Now Appendix G says to model the proposed building like the baseline bldg system. That means with a VAVVariable Air Volume (VAV) is an HVAC conservation feature that supplies varying quantities of conditioned (heated or cooled) air to different parts of a building according to the heating and cooling needs of those specific areas..
In other buildings that are cooled by chilled ceilings in the office areas and not cooled in toilets and storage I always modeled baseline and proposed building like the actual design (not cooled).
Now, can I ignore the cooling system if the whole building has no cooling like I did in partially cooled building or do I have to implement a VAV cooling even if there is no space for this system?
Would appreciate any helpful comment or discussion!
There is an established work around for this. You are allowed to set the cooling set point in both models very high so that the cooling systems never operate. Given this possibility it makes no sense to go through the exercise of modeling cooling systems which never run. If you explain this to the reviewer they should let it slide.
If you wish to claim any energy savings for natural ventilation be sure to follow the example in the Advanced Energy Modeling Guide for LEED.
Assuming that I use the BAM for showing compliance with the minimum energy performance prerequisite do I have to use the BAM also at the simulation for EAc1?
It would be more meaningful to use the values of table 9.6.1 (space-by-space) instead of the same LPDLighting power density (LPD) is the amount of electric lighting, usually measured in watts per square foot, being used to illuminate a given space. for every space types in the building. However the ASHRAE UsersManual states on page G-36
>>If the building area method is used, it must be used throughout the whole project.<< which would mean that I also have to use it for the simulation?
If you use Option 1 for EAp2 that is the method which determines the points for EAc1. So they are tied together. You do need to use the same lighting power density method in both models. We always use the space-by-space method as it is the more accurate of the two options and usually shows greater savings.
I'm not sure if I understood it right.
If we use the BAM to show compliance with ASHRAE section 9.4, do we also have to use the BAM at the simulation?
Only exterior lighting is covered under 9.4. Interior lighting is not a mandatory provision. It is a prescriptive requirement and therefore eligible for tradeoff so you do not have to meet or exceed the values in 9.5 or 9.6.
I’m working on a Core & Shell project that has as Energy source a District Heating that use only heat recovery from combustion of municipal solid waste, I would like to know if the compliance path described below is correct:
- Energy source:
o District heating that use only heat recovery from combustion of municipal solid waste
o Main task of the of combustion plant: waste disposal
o Thermal energy supplier: Teris
o Thermal energy specific cost by Teris: 0,0558 $/kWhA kilowatt-hour is a unit of work or energy, measured as 1 kilowatt (1,000 watts) of power expended for 1 hour. One kWh is equivalent to 3,412 Btu. (without capital recovery, maintenance and non energy costs)
- Energy source: electricity (no backup source is present in the building)
- HVAC system types are modified to be consistent with the purchased energy source (electricity)
Compliance Path for EAp2 and EAc1
- Meet all mandatory measures for downstream equipmentDownstream equipment consists of all heating or cooling systems, equipment, and controls located within the project building and site associated with transporting thermal energy into heated or cooled spaces. This includes the thermal connection or interface with the district energy system, secondary distribution systems in the building, and terminal units. according ASHRAE 90.1-2007
- Energy model per ASHRAE 90.1 2007 Appendix G using the following specific Energy costs for:
o Design Building: 0,0558 $/kWh (= thermal energy specific cost by Teris)
o Baseline Building: median electricity cost of the electric power supplier
Look to the District Energy Systems document for guidance. Option 1 models both proposed and baseline as purchased energy (this is the same approach as outlined in Appendix G). Option 2 requires the modeling of a virtual central plant in the proposed and an on-site heating plant according to Appendix G.
I don't see any possible scenario where the baseline uses electric heat as this scenario is purchased heat and that is listed in Table G3.1.1A in the fossil fuel column.
I'm modelling a 49-story building using Design Builder, and it has three separate HVAC systems (the first one on the 16th floor for the first 15 floors, the second is on the 32nd floor for the 17-31 floor and the last is on the 49th floor for the 33-48 floor). So, something I was wondering about is the possibility of designing separately the three groups before mentioned so that I can get the whole energy consumption by summing each energy consumption. I mean, something like “divide and conquer”.
If so, it would be really important for me since It would make my program not only faster but also without many fails because of its heavy size, as long as it is feasible and correct according to LEED. This is my first question.
My second question is the following; in my design I have many floors that are exactly the same, so I would like to know if there is a way to design only one of them and specify somehow that detail and how to specify that I’m assuming that.
Are you proposing to create three separate models and then add them together? I suppose that could work assuming there are no shared systems. I will make your LEED submission more complicated so make sure you do a good job of justifying and explaining what you have done.
We modeled a high rise recently in DB/EnergyPlus and our approach was to model one floor and make sure that that floor was working correctly. There were two primary floor types and they we stacked together. Once we had the two primary floor types working we then simply multiplied to get the required number of floors.
I am wondering if the tenant lease agreement can be used to specify undesigned elements for EAp2 similar to how it is used to achieve other credits. For example, for the warehouse I am working on there are office spaces that are not designed yet, which according to 90.1 means the proposed and baseline systems will be the same and will be System 4 - PSZ-HP. However, the owner would like to write into the lease agreement that tenants will have to use high-efficiency packaged RTUs, so I would like to use this system in the proposed. Similar for the lights, they will demand power densities less than the default values. Can we document these savings in the energy model, as long as the requirements are set forth in the lease agreement? Thanks
I know they can for lighting.
I would think the same would apply to HVAC system efficiency but I am not as certain on that one.
I’m modeling a 49-story building with 7 basements, and it has over 40 % (about 85 %) of its envelope covered with glazing, so I have a doubt about the calculation on the Window to Wall Ratio, to work it out, I found the example G-D in the 90.1 User’s Manual ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007 (page G-16).
Something I was wondering about is how to exactly compute the WWR, specifically, I want to know if I should consider only the gross above-grade wall area (as the Ashrae Standard mentions, Table G3.1.5.c) or I should consider the gross exterior wall area including the above-grade walls and below-grade wall area as well (90.1 User’s Manual ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007, page 5-47).
This is necessary because I have to reduce the percentage of glazing for my baseline design, and I don't really know if I should consider the 7 basements to calculate that reduction.
Last, my model also has a large green wall on a side and lattice covering almost all the building (with irregular shapes), so I would like you to share with me some information about how to model them please, because I haven’t seen anything in the Ashrae Standard about lattice and green wall. I think I only should consider the green wall in my proposed design, actually I was thinking about modeling it as a wall but changing the U-factor and R-factor, and with the lattice I had in mind something similar but modifying the U-factor and SHGCSolar heat gain coefficient (SHGC): The fraction of solar gain admitted through a window, expressed as a number between 0 and 1., but surfing on forums I found that it’s even more difficult to do it.
I hope you can help me!
The WWR is calculated on the above grade walls/windows and would not include the basements. There does appear to be a potential conflict between the Standard and the User's Manual. The Standard applies if the User's Manual conflicts. The Appendix G portion of the User's Manual and the Standard seem to be in sync.
I would treat the green wall areas as exterior shading devices assuming the lattice is added outside the wall/windows and the plants grow on the lattice. These can be modeled in the proposed but do not get modeled in the baseline. This would affect the solar loads but not the conductive loads so the U-valueU-value describes how well a building element conducts heat. It measures the rate of heat transfer through a building element over a given area, under standardized conditions. The greater the U-value, the less efficient the building element is as an insulator. The inverse of (1 divided by) the U-value is the R-value. would remain that of the windows but the SHGCSolar heat gain coefficient (SHGC): The fraction of solar gain admitted through a window, expressed as a number between 0 and 1. would vary. Depending on the planting material and climate the shading effect could vary seasonally. Be sure to include a thorough narrative explaining your modeling assumptions and you might even consider doing this as an exceptional calculation since this is not really a direct input in any modeling software I am aware of and so the saving claimed are called out. Good luck with this one.
The WWR is calculated based on gross-above grade wall areas, which includes the wall areas of conditioned and unconditioned spaces, right?
If in my project I have, for example, 7 above-grade floors of parking area, which have no glazing area, should I consider the area of these 7 floors in order to calculate the WWR?
I do not think that uncondtioned wall area counts for this ratio.
But the gross above-grade wall area accounts for all the above-grade wall area, doesn't it?
No, not really. The walls of the unconditioned spaces do not need to be insulated or meet any of the other window performance criteria so they would not count toward the fenestration area requirements either.
Wondering how to determine the baseline system for a warehouse that upon initial completion will be a cold, dark shell maintained at 50°F. For EAp2 we are assuming 10% office space for the future tenants and use of PSZ-AC units for those spaces. The remaining 90% is assumed to be warehouse space that will be only heated to maintain 50-60°F. How do I apply the system mapping of Table G3.1.1A to this building? Since the building is 200,000 SF and utilizes fossil fuels for heating, the table indicates System 7 – VAVVariable Air Volume (VAV) is an HVAC conservation feature that supplies varying quantities of conditioned (heated or cooled) air to different parts of a building according to the heating and cooling needs of those specific areas. with reheat. So would I apply that baseline system to the entire building or just the office spaces? If just to the office spaces, what would I use for the warehouse? The proposed model will have make-up air units and unit heaters in the warehouse. Would appreciate input anyone may have. Thanks,
Sounds like the predominant condition (see note under Table G3.1.1A) is the warehouse. It does not really matter what happens on initial completion in a CS project. All the spaces are modeled as if fully occupied. If you do not know the occupancy you will need to ask the owner what the space is intended for and model that based on assumptions found in the energy modeling appendix for CS projects in the Reference Guide. If the systems are not designed then they are modeled the same as the baseline in the proposed. If they are designed then the proposed is modeled as designed.
Of use in selecting your baseline system will be the exceptions to G3.1.1 which allow a secondary system for the office area. The warehouse itself may qualify as a system #9 or #10 from ASHRAE 90.1-2010 if the space is heating only.
Thanks Marcus. I appreciate the input. I think you’re right that system 9 from ASHRAE 90.1-2010 would be appropriate to use here. The only HVAC system that will be designed as part of the C&S scope is the gas unit heater system which will heat the entire building upon initial completion and only the warehouses once the tenants are built out. It makes a lot more sense to compare this to system 9 than to system 7. So that covers comparison of the designed elements to the baseline as determined by 90.1.
For the offices I will use system 4 - PSZ-HP for both the proposed and baseline models since those systems are not yet designed.
This approach makes the most sense to me since it allows documentation of energy savings for the designed system (if any), and leaves the undesigned area neutral.
Thanks for all your help!
We are working on a warehouse building with attached offices in climate zoneOne of five climatically distinct areas, defined by long-term weather conditions which affect the heating and cooling loads in buildings. The zones were determined according to the 45-year average (1931-1975) of the annual heating and cooling degree-days (base 65 degrees Fahrenheit). An individual building was assigned to a climate zone according to the 45-year average annual degree-days for its National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Division. 5A, with gas-fired rooftop equipment for heating. Per Table G3.1.1, the baseline system should be system type 5, but a significant portion of the warehouse space is "high hazard," which requires constant temperature & make-up & exhaust air. Page 272 of the 2009 reference guide says to use Table G3.1.1, except areas where occupancy, process loads or schedules differ significantly from the rest of the building, so can I use the proposed system type for the baseline? If not, what system type should be used?
You will need to apply one of the exceptions under G3.1.1 and that exception will tell you what baseline system to use. You could also look at applying a system #9 or #10 from 90.1-2010 if that works for your situation.
The high hazard area is heated and cooled, so system types 9 & 10 cannot be used. It is 1-story and over 25,000 sf, so the baseline would still have to be type 5. The real system must be constant volume due to the type of materials being stored in this area and their associated ventilation load. Can an exception be justified through a narrative for a case such as this?
If G3.1.1 exception b or c is applied then it is a system 3, not a 5.
The only other exception I can think of is that this is a process load and is therefore modeled identically. If the space conditioning is related to the equipment and not the occupants then perhaps it can be justified.
Currently, I'm working on a warehouse's project under LEED certification. There's no heating/cooling system in the warehouses, there's only natural ventilation.
In the building simulation, I dind't include any cooling/heating system and then I made some comfort evaluation and there are many discomfort hours.
Should I include any cooling/heating system for the discomfort hours, or the concept of unmet load hours are only applicable when we talk about conditioned areas?
Should the energy cost only consider the other uses?
You do not have to include a heating/cooling system in an unconditioned space. The unmet load hours do not apply to unconditioned spaces. This would be the same as an unconditioned parking garage. Assuming the warehouse is part of the LEED submission, the energy cost must include all energy use within and associated with this space including lighting, plug load, process loads, ventilation, etc.
While this only applies to heating only systems you might want to check out Systems #9 and #10 from Table G3.1.1A in 90.1-2010.
Thanks a lot!
I am working on a project which is equipped with air-cooled chillers. According to ASHRAE 90.1-2007, Appendix G, table G220.127.116.11. I was required to use water-cooled chiller in the referece energy model.
Now, I am filling in ASHRAE compliance forms and I am not sure if I should compare the proposed chiller (and its efficiency) with air-cooled chiller or if I should compare it with the minimum efficiency of water-cooled chiller as it was done in energy modeling.
In the compliance form the Appendix G baseline is not used at all. Compare your chiller to the same sized air-cooled chiller in the HVAC compliance form.
I'm participating in a project of a building of 20 floors of offices, of which the first corresponds to shops and entrance hall. There are approximately 30000 m² conditioned by cooled chillers only cold water for cooling and heat pumpA type of heating and/or cooling equipment that draws heat into a building from outside and, during the cooling season, ejects heat from the building to the outside. Heat pumps are vapor-compression refrigeration systems whose indoor/outdoor coils are used reversibly as condensers or evaporators, depending on the need for heating or cooling. In the 2003 CBECS, specific information was collected on whether the heat pump system was a packaged unit, residential-type split system, or individual room heat pump, and whether the heat pump was air source, ground source, or water source. chillers air cooled operating only for heating.
The problem is in classifying heat pump chillers, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007 low, as these have centrifugal fans to reject heat from the condenser, consider working at 8.3 ° C of outdoor dry bulb temperature and have a heating capacity of 210 kW. From my point of view classified According to Table 6.8.1 Type D SPVHP equipment (heating mode). Anyway I am not clear if classified, have centrifugal fans because consumption increases and decreases considerably the final COP. On the other hand its capacity would be out of range.
1) Not considered in determination of centrifugal fans and consider clasificaccion assumed COP?
2) Classify by type, but is excluded by capacity?
Direct response from USGBC:
"If the question is in regard to not having a classification in ASHRAE 90.1-2007, we agree that there is no classification that specifically addresses your air cooled heat pumpA type of heating and/or cooling equipment that draws heat into a building from outside and, during the cooling season, ejects heat from the building to the outside. Heat pumps are vapor-compression refrigeration systems whose indoor/outdoor coils are used reversibly as condensers or evaporators, depending on the need for heating or cooling. In the 2003 CBECS, specific information was collected on whether the heat pump system was a packaged unit, residential-type split system, or individual room heat pump, and whether the heat pump was air source, ground source, or water source. chiller. In this instance we recommend that you thoroughly document your assumptions and provide any additional supporting documentation to substantiate your position when submitting your project for review."
The maximum power allowance for building façades is 2.2 W/m2 for each illuminated wall or surface. If I have two façades, one of them below 2.2W/m2, and the other above this limit, can I compensate values of both? Thank you for your help!
The Green Engineer, LLP
EAc1 relies directly on the EAp2 documentation, and the strategies to earn the prerequisite are often similar to earning points under the credit.
Limits on interior and exterior light use can help in reducing energy loads.
Daylighting reduces demand on installation and use of lighting fixtures resulting in energy use. To full realize the energy benefits, contorl electrical lighting with daylight sensors.
Commissioning of energy-efficient building systems helps realize he operational benefits of the design.
Onsite renewable energy contributes to prerequisite achievement if pursuing energy modeling under Option 1.
The computer model developed for EAp2 – Option 1 is used in the M&V plan.
Do you know which LEED credits have the most LEED Interpretations and addenda, and which have none? The Missing Manual does. Check here first to see where you need to update yourself, and share the link with your team.
LEEDuser members get it free >
LEEDuser is produced by BuildingGreen, Inc., with YR&G authoring most of the original content. LEEDuser enjoys ongoing collaboration with USGBC. Read more about our team
Copyright 2013 – BuildingGreen, Inc.